LeadershipScore

We now have followers, and one might assume that the person with the most followers would be quite the leader. But to get the full measure of a persons leadership abilities you'd need at least calculate the number of people that follow you divided by the number of people you follow. Maybe throw in a few other parameters to make it a neat and tidy score out of 100.

But would we not see people simply leaving fan clubs to get their leadership scores up? Actually, I do think that this is a terrible idea (first time), I have leaders at work, leaders at home (gf), leaders in the community, leaders in wider society. Hubpages is my one true community, where there are no leaders.

I dont want to show any more of my disapproval with your idea Darkside, in fear of being 'excommunicated' I agree with the lack of penalty for those than go fanning.... it normally only drops them down to 74. It only takes a day off from fanning and a new hub to get back to 80+..... I have been watching a serial fanner for a while, and they have the system completely sussed.

Yeah it does, but rewarding people for following less people means less followers..... less followers means less people on your mailing list, meaning less traffic, personally I am happy being fanned.... my hubs get between 20-50 views on their first day through email notifications and twitter. That has to be a good thing? Because google will pick up on that? Darkside has a lot of fans, and is a member of not many fan clubs, cant you see that he just knows he will be one of the leaders

well, he already is. all I'm saying is just because some have many fans because they asked for them doesn't make them a true leader. people like darkside and relache have lots of 'true' followers, we read their hubs.

I do get what you're all saying though, to cut down on the fanning and more people helping the community.

The Klout Score is a numerical representation of the size and strength of a person's sphere of influence on Twitter. The scores range from 1-100 with higher scores representing a wider and stronger sphere of influence. The size of this sphere is calculated by measuring true reach (engaged followers and friends vs. spam bots, dead accounts, etc.). Strength of influence is calculated by tracking interactions across your social graph to determine the likelihood of someone listening to or acting upon any specific message.

Having retired from the military after 20 years, I may have some jaded views on 'leadership'.

I think Hub leadership would have to include mentoring. It would be great if there were a way for a formula to include meaningful contributions such as helpful advice rendered in the forums and/or in “How To Hub” hubs. Reading hubs and offering support and constructive comments would also be a show of leadership.

I agree indiscriminant fanning should not be rewarded. I can think of a few hubbers who have quite a presence in the forums, and who seem to fan a lot of people from the forums in hopes of being fanned in returned. They therefore have lots of fans and lots of posts. Many of these hubbers are fantastic support to other hubbers in congrats on milestones, kind words to those in distress etc. This is all great, but does not reflect leadership if they do not read hubs other than their own and cannot offer valid advice.

To a certain idea. I did think that the change to 'followers' eludes to there being leaders. Though more so to do with leadership qualities rather than someone thinking they're a Leader.

A score of 'respect' or 'clout' may reduce the abuse of the fan, now follow, link. But there's a penalty for that anyway.

I had once suggested there be under the fans total, the number of people a person is a fan of (so under 'followers' it would have 'following'). But it was pointed out that some may see it as a competition. Which would be right. I only wanted to see those numbers so I could measure and weigh a person myself to see what a total 'fammer' they were.

Mr Deeds did suggest that the fans to followers change was paving the way for other developments. It will be interesting to see what that will be.

so few have it that most don't recognize it. also, if we're in search of the perfect score, then contribution to the community comes into play. what exactly is the community? is it for writing? if so, then grammatically correct hubs should be rewarded. the scoring system as it currently stands is obviously flawed in that regard. many factors come into play when trying to determine a leader. then there's the whole obama v. palin crowd to factor in. what about global warming? what will the leader's position be on these and so many other issues?

while i too have heard the rumors of change, it still sounds like we're talking politics here.

I'm confused about how someone would arrange to get that 100. I'm also confused about leaders versus followers and the idea that people might defan other people, etc. etc. Let me get this straight: it's said that good leaders also know how to follow - so there's that. Then there's the thing about how a good leader knows how to get people to go to "heck" and enjoy the trip.... Then there's the thing that on HubPages "followers" would still be "fans" if not for a matter of a few days, which one would think would make us "stars" - not "leaders", but so many people expressed distaste for the word, "follower" (as if it meant they had a cult following or had a bunch of zombie-eyed folks following them - woudn't that mean that all that reluctance to be a leader would be a sign of lack of leadership skills? So are we "followers", "fans", "groupies", "zombies", or stars - and, by the way, are we human or are we dancers? Again, I'm SO confused. Oh - and also, how exactly would we arrange to get that 100 score again?

Separate from my joking posts above, I wouldn't necessarily be bothered by the concept of having "subscribers" (to me, always the better term); but it would be better if there weren't wild, meaningless fanning sprees or fanning for the sole purpose of getting someone else to fan back. The "fanning"/"following" thing does serve the purpose of calling attention to the Hubs we're most likely to interested in; so I don't think existence of that particular aspect (the following thing) of the system should bother anyone. Based on a lot of recent comments about the meaning of the word, "follower", it seems its meaning is in the eye of the beholder. I don't see it as meaning anything more than "as in "following" a newspaper column" or "as in following on Twitter." It's fine. Just about all writing sites have some version of it.

Your last sentence does nothing to make this process any better. I would guess the majority of "fan/followers rarely even read the many new hubs they are notified of. Do you? I take it as a "choose me and I'll choose you" childish game. There are lots of things other sites do I hope never happens here.

From time to time I may follow couple of hubbers, but may end up quit following small number of them, if I see they don't even care about my fan mails after many days(e.g, one was disapprove surprisingly, or leave it...

I spent whole this evening debating the leadership however, I want to ask hubbers, what is leadership in your view. Define.. Do you think leaders and managers are the same or different?Only serious content please!

December 7, 2011Hello to ALL on My Followers List!Yesterday and today, I have spent some time trying to read and offer my sincere comments on what followers' hubs that I could. I am leaving you this in case I cannot...

I was just wondering: Why is it that several of the most financially successful hubbers rarely have a writer score of 100 - Mark Knowles, Sunforged, Darkside, Ryankett, Misha, etc? Is it because they spend more time...